Effect of corrosive solutions on composites laminates subjected to low
- 格式:pdf
- 大小:1.59 MB
- 文档页数:7
Effect of corrosive solutions on composites laminates subjected to low velocity impactloadingN.Mortas a ,O.Er b ,P.N.B.Reis c ,⇑,J.A.M.Ferreira daDepart.Mechatronic Engineering,Bozok University,Yozgat,TurkeybDepart.Electric &Electronic Engineering,Bozok University,Yozgat,Turkey cDepart.Electromechanical Engineering,University of Beira Interior,Covilhã,Portugal dCEMUC,Depart.Mechanical Engineering,University of Coimbra,Coimbra,Portugala r t i c l e i n f o Article history:Available online 25September 2013Keywords:Corrosive solutionsPolymer–matrix composites (PMCs)Impact behaviour Mechanical testinga b s t r a c tIn recent years,there has been a rapid growth in the use of fibre reinforced composite materials in engi-neering applications and this phenomenon will be continuing.In this context,composite structures can be exposed to a range of corrosive environments during their in-service life,which causes degradation in terms of material properties.Some works can be found in open literature,but the studies presented are not sufficient to establish a full knowledge about this subject.Therefore,the aim of this work is study the low velocity impact response of Kevlar/epoxy laminates and carbon/epoxy laminates,after immersion into hydrochloric acid (HCl)and sodium hydroxide (NaOH).The aggressive solutions affect significantly the impact strength,but their effects are strongly dependent of the concentration.On the other hand,a significant effect of the temperature can be found,independently of the aggressive solution,on the impact performance and residual bending strength.Ó2013Elsevier Ltd.All rights reserved.1.IntroductionIn recent years,there has been a rapid growth in the use of fibre reinforced composite materials in engineering applications and there is a clear indication that this will be continuing.In this con-text,it is becoming common the components manufactured by composite materials for applications at highly corrosive environ-ments,as an alternative to the stainless or coated steels.However,the studies presented on the open literature are not sufficient to establish a full knowledge about the effect of hostile solutions on the PMC mechanical properties.Stamenovic et al.[1]compared,for glass/polyester composites,the effect of alkaline and acid solutions on their tensile properties,concluding that the alkaline solution decreases the ultimate tensile strength and modulus.However,the acid solution increases the tensile properties and this phenomenon was more relevant when the pH value decreases.On the other hand,for both solutions,Stamenovic et al.[1]concluded that the changes observed on the tensile properties are proportional with the number of days into immersion.The period of exposure was studied by Mahmoud and Tantawi [2]and significant influence of this parameter on the flexural strength,hardness and Charpy impact resistance was found by these authors.The flexural strength of the glass/polyester composite is insensitive until 30days of immersion in HCl and,after this period,a decrease around 10%was observed.In terms of hardness,they showed that the Barcol hardness drops around 15%after 90days of exposure.A slight decrease of the Charpy im-pact resistance (about 5%)was observed during the first 60days of immersion but,between 60and 90days,a significant drop of 10%was posites with different resins were immersed into two aqueous acid solutions and,according with Banna et al.[3],their final mechanical properties showed to be very dependents of the resins used.Amaro et al.[4]developed a systematic study about the effects of alkaline (NaOH)and acid (HCl)solutions on glass/epoxy composites.These authors found that,independently of the solution,the flexural strength and the flexural modulus de-creases with the exposure time.On the other hand,the alkaline solution (NaOH)showed to be more aggressive than the acid solution (HCl),promoting the lowest flexural properties.The flex-ural strength,after 36days of exposure,decreased around 22%for the NaOH solution and 16.2%for the HCl solution.Similar ten-dency was observed for the flexural modulus with values around 26.9%and 22.3%,plementary tests were carried out and the ultramicroindentation showed a decreasing of the matrix mechanical properties.The roughness increased with the exposure time and was higher for the samples immersed in alka-line solutions.The effect of different acid solutions was studied,in a similar work,by the same authors [5].In this case,a hydro-chloric acid (HCl)and a sulphuric acid (H 2SO 4)were used and0263-8223/$-see front matter Ó2013Elsevier Ltd.All rights reserved./10.1016/pstruct.2013.09.032Corresponding author.Tel.:+351275329725;fax:+351275329972.E-mail address:preis@ubi.pt (P.N.B.Reis).theflexural properties were affected significantly by these solu-tions.For example,after36days of exposition,theflexural strength decreased around16.2%for the HCl solution and11.6% for the H2SO4solution.Similar tendency was observed for theflex-ural modulus with values around22.4%and17.6%,respectively.It is evident that the hydrochloric acid was responsible by the worst results.It is well known that the composites are very strong in the plane,but with very low impact performance through the thick-ness.Various types of damages can occur,which are very danger-ous because they are not easily detected visually[6,7]and they can affect significantly the residual properties and structural integrity of those materials[8–12].However,low velocity impact associated with highly corrosive environments,is reported in bibliography only by Amaro et al.[4,5]on glass/epoxy composites.According with these authors,the resistance of the glass/epoxy laminates to repeated low velocity impacts is very dependent of the corrosive environment and the exposure time.The alkaline solution shows to be more aggressive than the acid solution,promoting the lowest impact resistance.On the other hand,comparing the hydrochloric acid(HCl)with the sulphuric acid(H2SO4),thefirst one is respon-sible by the lowest impact performance.Therefore,the aim of this work is study the low velocity impact response of Kevlar/epoxy laminates and carbon/epoxy laminates, after immersion into hydrochloric acid(HCl)and sodium hydroxide(NaOH).These solutions were selected because,accord-ing with Amaro et al.[4,5],they promoted the lowest impact per-formance.The effect of concentration and temperature of the solutions on the impact strength was analysed and the residual bending strength was compared with the control samples.In fact, composites reinforced by carbon or Kevlarfibres have several applicationfields,but the open literature does not report any study about the effect of corrosive environments on their impact strength.2.Material and experimental procedureTwo different composite laminates were manufactured by hand lay-up and the overall dimensions of the plates obtained were 330Â330Â3(mm).An Ampreg22epoxy resin and an Ampreg 22hardener standard,supplied by Gurit,was used with nine lay-ers,all in the same direction,of woven bi-directional Kevlar170-1000P(170g/m2)and woven bi-directional carbon195–1000 (195g/m2)to produce each laminate.The system was placed inside a vacuum bag and a load of2.5kN was applied for48h in order to maintain a constantfibre volume fraction and an uniform laminate thickness.During thefirst10h the bag remained attached to a vac-uum pump to eliminate any air bubbles existing in the composite. The post-cure was carried out in an oven at45°C for48h.The samples used in the experiments were cut from these plates to square specimens with100mm side and3mm thickness206N.Mortas et al./Composite Structures108(2014)205–211(100Â100Â3mm).Afterwards,they were completely sub-merged into hydrochloric acid(HCl)and sodium hydroxide (NaOH),at room temperature,during20days.Both solutions pre-sented a concentration of5%,15%,25%and35%in weight(wt.%). The effect of the temperature was also analysed and,for this study, the specimens were submerged,during20days,at40°C and60°C into both solutions with a concentration of15%in weight(wt.%). Finally,the samples were washed with clean water and dried at room temperature.Low-velocity impact tests were performed using a drop weight-testing machine IMATEK-IM10.More details of the impact machine can be found in[13].An impactor diameter of20mm with a mass of3.005kg was used.The tests were performed on square section samples of dimensions75Â75mm and the impactor stroke at the centre of the samples obtained by centrally supporting the 100Â100mm specimens.The impact energy used was10J which corresponds to an impact velocity of2.6msÀ1.After impact tests,the specimens were submitted to three point bending(3PB)tests.The specimens were tested with a span of 50mm using a Shimadzu AG-10universal testing machine equipped with a5kN load cell and TRAPEZIUM software at a dis-placement rate of5mm/min.3.Results and discussionImpact tests were carried out on different materials after expo-sure to the HCl and NaOH solutions with several concentrations. Figs.1and2shows the force–time and force–displacement curves, respectively,for both composite laminates(Kevlar/epoxy and car-bon/epoxy laminates).These diagrams represent a typical behav-iour occurred for all specimens and agree with the bibliography [14–19].The curves contain oscillations that result from the elastic wave and are created by the vibrations of the samples[18–20].It depends on the stiffness and the mass of the specimen and impac-tor being excited by the rapid variation of the cinematic magni-tudes at the collision moment[18,19,21].It is possible to observe that the force increases up to a maxi-mum value,P max,followed by a drop after the peak load.The im-pact energy was not high enough to infiltrate full penetration, because the impactor sticks into specimens and rebound always. Therefore,non-perforating impact occurred for all laminates.How-ever,when the concentration of the solutions increases there are higher displacements and contact time,which means that major damage occurs.Table1shows the effect of the aggressive environments on maximum load(P max),maximum displacement and contact time in terms of average values and respective standard deviation. These parameters are significantly affected by the corrosive solu-tions.In terms of Kevlar/epoxy laminates,and comparing the con-trol samples with the samples immersed into5wt.%of NaOH,the load decreases around16.3%,while the displacement and contact time increases about0.4%and1%,respectively.However,these val-ues are dramatically affected when the samples are immersed into 35wt.%of NaOH,with differences of26.8%,7.3%and4.1%,respec-tively.Similar tendency can be found for the samples immersed into HCl solution,where,for the same comparison(control samples versus samples immersed into35wt.%of HCl),the load decreases around18.8%but the displacement and contact time increases about9%and11.5%,respectively.The results described before can be replicated for the carbon/epoxy laminates.In this case,com-paring with the control samples,the maximum load observed for the samples immersed into35wt.%of NaOH decreases aroundTable1Effect of corrosive solutions on the impact parameters.The values should be centred.Laminates Solution Concentration(wt.%)Maximum load Maximum displacement Contact timeAverage(kN)St.dev.(kN)Average(mm)St dev.(mm)Average(ms)St dev.(ms)Kevlar a– 3.5930.03 6.750.247.320.14 NaOH5 3.0080.1 6.780.117.390.3115 2.8960.12 6.830.247.470.3925 2.8870.117.010.197.510.5235 2.6310.147.240.167.620.15HCl5 3.3110.09 6.940.267.380.2715 3.1420.17.010.277.770.1325 3.0910.067.110.167.850.1635 2.9190.047.360.188.160.28Carbon a– 3.1630.02 6.610.078.040.02 NaOH5 2.4350.077.270.169.390.4115 2.2210.137.330.129.470.1225 2.1610.117.490.119.590.2635 2.0020.117.710.179.680.34HCl5 2.6460.057.500.129.580.3515 2.3460.117.520.089.650.1825 2.2950.097.660.099.710.2835 2.1110.037.910.1110.140.11a Control samples.N.Mortas et al./Composite Structures108(2014)205–21120736.7%,while the displacement and the contact time increases about 16.6%and 20.4%,respectively.On the other hand,the same comparison for 35wt.%of HCl presents values about 33.3%,19.7%and 26.1%,respectively.Therefore,it is possible to conclude that the results agree with the study developed by Amaro et al.[4],where the effect of NaOH solution,compared to the HCl solution,promotes the lowest maximum load,displacement and contact time.Fig.3shows the effect of the aggressive solutions,and respec-tive concentration,on elastic recovery (elastic recuperation).For this purpose,the elastic energy was calculated as the difference between the absorbed energy and the energy at peak load [18,19].For both laminates,it is possible to observe that the corro-sive environment decreases the elastic energy and its effect is highly dependent with the concentration of the solution.The alka-line solution promotes the lowest elastic energies,because these solutions are highly corrosives [1,4,22].For example,in terms of Kevlar/epoxy laminates,a decrease about 20.8%occurs for 35wt.%of HCl and around 25.9%for 35wt.%of NaOH solution,when compared with the control samples.In terms of carbon/epoxy laminates,these values are around 12.6%and 18.3%,respectively.All samples were inspected by C-Scan technique in a square area of 50Â40mm,containing the impact zone.For the ultrasonic analysis a 25MHz broadband immersion piezocomposite trans-ducer was used in the pulse-echo mode.More details about the technique and equipment can be found on [7].The samples were inspected by the opposite side of the impact.Fig.4showsthedamages for:(a)Carbon laminates (control samples);(b)Kevlar laminates (control samples);(c)carbon laminates 15%NaOH;(e)carbon laminates immersed into 35%NaOH;(f)Kevlar laminates immersed into 35%NaOH;laminates immersed into 15%HCl.typical images obtained for some laminates,however,they are rep-resentative of the other ones.It is noted that the damage can be de-tected without ambiguity,where the blue colour represents the main damage[7].The blue area was measured by Image-Pro Plus software.As expected,the damaged area increases with the decreasing of elastic energy and the highest damages occur for samples exposed to the sodium hydroxide(NaOH).These results agree with the studies developed by Amaro et al.[4].For all conditions analysed,the damaged area was higher for Kevlar/epoxy laminates.In fact,the aramidfibres do not fail by brittle cracking,as do glass or carbonfibres,but they fail essen-tially by a series of smallfibril failures[18].According with Aktas et al.[23]the main energy absorption mechanism for carbon-fibre reinforced composite isfibre breakage mode,while for Kevlar com-posites it is essentially by delaminations.On the other hand,for a woven laminate,delamination starts at the centre of impact and propagates to the directions of warp andfillsfibres[18].Addition-ally,aramidfibres are strongly hygroscopic and often with values higher than the matrices.A maximum moisture content of6%is re-ported for Kevlar-49at room temperature96%RH[24].Studies developed by Reis et al.[25]shown that,after100days,the system SR1500epoxy resin and SD2503hardener presents around0.9%of moisture content,but when the Kevlarfibres are added to the resin this value increases2.5times.In this context,the combined action of water and corrosivefluids leads to matrix expansion,with con-sequent occurrence of microcracks and/or development of micro-stresses in the composites[26–29].These microcracks,according with some researchers,play an important role at the onset of del-aminations,with consequent increase of the damaged area[4,30]. Mahmoud and Tantawi[2],for example,associated the drop of mechanical properties with the absorption,penetration and reac-tion that occur between the solutions and the composite constitu-ents(matrix andfibres).For Hammami and Al-Ghilani[26]the degradation takes place via two stages.In thefirst stage resin is at-tacked under the combined action of water diffusion and the pres-ence of H+.In the second stage thefibre itself is attacked and cracks appear on thefibre surface.Therefore,the poorfibre matrix con-nection promotes the weakness of the load carrying capacity of the laminate[1].After impact,residual bending strength was obtained for each condition studied as shows Fig.5.The term‘‘residual bending strength’’corresponds to the maximum bending load obtained from the load–displacement curves collected of the three point bending(3PB)tests.In terms of carbon/epoxy laminates,for exam-ple,comparing the control samples with samples immersed into 35wt.%of NaOH,the residual bending strength decreases around 9.9%,while for35wt.%of HCl this value is about6.5%.However, for the same comparison,the values obtained for Kevlar/epoxy laminates drops significantly to34.0%and21.6%,respectively.As expected,for both laminates,the alkaline solution promotes the lowest residual bending strength.On the other hand,the lowest residual bending strength occurred for Kevlar/epoxy laminates, as consequence of the highest damaged areas(see Fig.4).According with Amaro et al.[4],the decreasing observed on the flexural properties can be explained,also,by the matrix/fibre inter-face degradation and by the Young’s modulus of the matrix.This property is significantly affected when the polymeric matrixes are exposed to the aggressive solutions[4].To identify the influ-ence of the Young’s modulus on the residual bending strength, and on the impact parameters,this property was evaluated by ult-ramicroindentation using Fisherscope H100equipment and a load of500mN.The testes were performed according with Antunes et al.[31]and Fig.6shows the results obtained.The results agree with the study developed by Amaro et al.[4]. It is possible to observe that the Young’s modulus decreases,inde-pendently of the solutions,but the decreasing observed is more expressive in terms of solutions’concentration.On the other hand, and comparing both materials studied,the Kevlar/epoxy laminates are responsible by the lowest Young’s modulus.This phenomenon can be explained by the strong hygroscopic behaviour of the ara-midfibres,which promotes higher wetting of the matrix.The effect of the temperature was also analysed and Table2 presents the results obtained.The specimens were submerged, during20days,at room temperature(22°C),40°C and60°C into both solutions with a concentration of15wt.%.It is possible to observe that,independently of the solution, higher temperatures induce a decreasing of the maximum loads, but the opposite can be found for the displacement and the contact time.In terms of Kevlar/epoxy laminates,for example,the sodium hydroxide(NaOH)promotes a decreasing of the maximum loads around9.3%,while the displacement and the contact time in-creases about10.1%and2.3%,respectively,when the room temper-ature is compared with the temperature of60°C.Similar tendency can be found for the samples immersed into hydrochloric acid (HCl)with values around8.9%,10.6%and6.7%,respectively.On the other hand,for the carbon/epoxy laminates,the alkaline solu-tion(NaOH)promotes a decreasing of the maximum loads around 9.9%,while the displacement and the contact time increases aboutN.Mortas et al./Composite Structures108(2014)205–21120911.5%and6.3%,respectively.For the acid solution(HCl),these val-ues are around8.3%,12.1%and6%,respectively.Fig.7shows the effect of the temperature on the elastic recov-ery(elastic recuperation).Independently of the temperature,the lowest elastic recovery occurs for samples exposed to the sodium hydroxide(NaOH).The temperature promotes a significant drop of the elastic energy and,for the Kevlar/epoxy laminates,a decreasing of21.1%can be found for the samples immersed into 15wt.%of HCl at60°C and around24.9%for15wt.%of NaOH at 60°C,when compared with the same solutions at room tempera-ture.For the carbon/epoxy laminates these values are around 16.4%and19.6%,respectively.One more time,in terms of elastic recovery,the Kevlar/epoxy laminates are responsible by the high-est drop,which is a consequence of the highest damaged areas. Fig.8shows the residual bending strength and can prove the last sentence.A significant effect of the temperature can be found,indepen-dently of the aggressive solution,on the residual bending strength. However,as expected,the alkaline solution promotes the lowest residual bending strength.In this context,and comparing the re-sults obtained at60°C with the other ones at room temperature, the residual bending strength decreases around21.7%for the car-bon/epoxy laminates and about25.1%for the Kevlar/epoxy lami-nates.In terms of acid solution(HCl)these values are14.9%and 19.3%,respectively.The aggressive solutions are absorbed mainly by the resins and the temperature affects its absorption[32].As diffusion is a thermally activated process,an increase in tempera-ture accelerates short-term diffusion and increases the diffusion coefficient On the other hand,different coefficients of thermal expansion between thefibre and the polymeric matrix develops residual stresses at the interface,which can result in microvoids or cracks[33].In this context,the aggressive solution creates a hydrostatic pressure at the crack tips and hastens the crack prop-agation and damage in the matrix[34].4.ConclusionsThis work studied the low velocity impact response of different laminates after immersion in hydrochloric acid(HCl)and sodium hydroxide(NaOH).Special focus was taken in terms of concentra-tion and temperature of these aggressive solutions.For both laminates,it was possible to conclude that the corro-sive environments affect significantly the impact response,but their effects are strongly dependent of the solutions’concentration. The alkaline solution shows to be more aggressive than the acid solution,promoting the lowest impact performance and residual bending strength.For Kevlar/epoxy laminates,the elastic recovery decreased about20.8%for35wt.%of HCl and around25.9%for 35wt.%of NaOH solution,when compared with the control sam-ples.Regarding to carbon/epoxy laminates,these values were around12.6%and18.3%,paring the control sam-ples with samples immersed into35wt.%of NaOH,the residualTable2Effect of temperature for the different solutions on the impact parameters.The values should be centred.Laminates Solution Temperature(°C)Maximum load Maximum displacement Contact timeAverage(kN)St.dev.(kN)Average(mm)St.dev.(mm)Average(ms)St.dev.(ms)Kevlar NaOH22 2.8960.12 6.830.247.470.3940 2.7980.187.220.237.560.2660 2.6270.197.520.187.640.21HCl22 3.1420.17.010.277.770.1340 3.0170.117.530.197.850.1560 2.8630.167.750.218.290.11Carbon NaOH22 2.2210.137.330.129.470.1240 2.1660.127.890.139.730.1960 2.0010.188.170.1410.070.18HCl22 2.3460.117.520.089.650.1840 2.3140.138.170.1310.110.1760 2.1510.178.430.2610.230.15210N.Mortas et al./Composite Structures108(2014)205–211bending strength decreased around9.9%,while for35wt.%of HCl this value was about6.5%.On the other hand,the values obtained for Kevlar/epoxy laminates drops significantly to34.0%and21.6%, respectively.Consequently,for all conditions analysed,the dam-aged area was higher for Kevlar/epoxy laminates.Independently of the solution,higher temperatures induce a decreasing of the maximum loads,but the opposite occurs for the displacement and the contact time.The temperature promotes a significant drop of the elastic energy for both laminates.For Kev-lar/epoxy laminates,a decreasing of21.1%was found for the sam-ples immersed into15wt.%of HCl at60°C and around24.9%for 15wt.%of NaOH at60°C,when compared with the same solutions at room temperature.Relatively to the carbon/epoxy laminates these values were around16.4%and19.6%,respectively.A signifi-cant effect of the temperature on the residual bending strength was also found,independently of the aggressive solution.For NaOH a decreasing around21.7%for the carbon/epoxy laminates and about25.1%for the Kevlar/epoxy laminates was obtained.In terms of acid solution(HCl)these values were14.9%and19.3%, respectively.References[1]Stamenovic M,Putic S,Rakin M,Medjo B,Cikara D.Effect of alkaline and acidsolutions on the tensile properties of glass–polyester pipes.Mater Des 2011;32:2456–61.[2]Mahmoud MK,Tantawi SH.Effect of strong acids on mechanical properties ofglass/polyester GRP pipe at normal and high temperatures.Polym Plast Technol Eng2003;42:677–88.[3]Banna MH,Shirokoff J,Molgaard J.Effects of two aqueous acid solutions onpolyester and bisphenol A epoxy vinyl ester resins.Mat Sci Eng A–Struct 2011;528:2137–42.[4]Amaro AM,Reis PNB,Neto MA,Louro C.Effects of alkaline and acid solutionson glass/epoxy composites.Polym Degrad Stabil2013;98:853–62.[5]Amaro AM,Reis PNB,Neto MA,Louro C.Effect of different acid solutions onglass/epoxy composites.J Reinf Plast Comp2013;32:1018–29.[6]Adams RD,Cawley PD.A Review of defects types and non-destructive testingtechniques for composites and bonded joints.NDT Int1998;21:208–22. [7]Amaro AM,Reis PNB,de Moura MFSF,Santos JB.Damage detection onlaminated composite materials using several NDT techniques.Insight 2012;54:14–20.[8]Davies GAO,Hitchings D,Zhou G.Impact damage and residual strengths ofwoven fabric glass/polyester pos Part A–Appl S1996;27: 1147–56.[9]de Moura MFSF,Marques AT.Prediction of low velocity impact damage incarbon–epoxy pos Part A–Appl S2002;33:361–8.[10]Amaro AM,de Moura MFSF,Reis PNB.Residual strength after low velocityimpact in carbon–epoxy laminates.Mater Sci Forum2006;514–516:624–8.[11]Amaro AM,Reis PNB,de Moura MFSF.Delamination effect on bendingbehaviour in carbon–epoxy composites.Strain2011;47:203–8.[12]Reis PNB,Ferreira JAM,Antunes FV,Richardson MOW.Effect of interlayerdelamination on mechanical behavior of carbon/epoxy laminates.J Compos Mater2009;43:2609–21.[13]Amaro AM,Reis PNB,Magalhães AG,de Moura MFSF.The influence of theboundary conditions on low-velocity impact composite damage.Strain 2011;47:e220–6.[14]Aslan Z,Karakuzu R,Okutan B.The response of laminated composite platesunder low-velocity impact pos Struct2003;59:119–27.[15]Hosur MV,Adbullah M,Jeelani S.Studies on the low-velocity impact responseof woven hybrid pos Struct2005;67:253–62.[16]Gustin J,Joneson A,Mahinfalah M,Stone J.Low velocity impact ofcombination Kevlar/carbonfiber sandwich pos Struct 2005;69:396–406.[17]Iqbal K,Khan S-U,Munir A,Kim J-K.Impact damage resistance of CFRP withnanoclay-filled epoxy pos Sci Technol2009;69:1949–57.[18]Reis PNB,Ferreira JAM,Santos P,Richardson MOW,Santos JB.Impact responseof Kevlar composites withfilled epoxy pos Struct2012;94: 3520–8.[19]Reis PNB,Ferreira JAM,Zhang ZY,Benameur T,Richardson MOW.Impactresponse of Kevlar composites with nanoclay enhanced epoxy pos Part B–Eng2013;46:7–14.[20]Schoeppner GA,Abrate S.Delamination threshold loads for low velocityimpact on composite pos Part A–Appl S2000;31:903–15. [21]Belingardi G,Vadori R.Low velocity impact of laminate glass-fiber–epoxymatrix composite materials plates.Int J Impact Eng2002;27:213–29.[22]Griffiths R,Ball A.An assessment of the properties and degradation behaviourof glass-fibre-reinforced polyester polymer pos Sci Technol 2000;60:2747–53.[23]Aktas M,Atas C,Icten BM,Karakuzu R.An experimental investigation of theimpact response of composite pos Struct2009;87:307–13. [24]Akay M,Mun SKA,Stanley A.Influence of moisture on the thermal andmechanical properties of autoclaved and oven-cured Kevlar-49/epoxy pos Sci Technol1997;57:565–71.[25]Reis PNB,Ferreira JAM,Costa JDM,Santos MJ.Fatigue performance of Kevlar/epoxy composites withfilled matrix by cork powder.Fiber Polym2012;13: 1292–9.[26]Hammami A,Al-Ghuilani N.Durability and environmental degradation ofglass–vinylester composites.Polym Compos2004;16:609–16.[27]Adams DF,Miller AK.Hydrothermal microstresses in a unidirectionalcomposite exhibiting inelastic material behavior.J Compos Mater1977;11: 285–99.[28]Arun KV,Basavarajappa S,Sherigara BS.Damage characterisation of glass/textile fabric polymer hybrid composites in sea water environment.Mater Des 2010;31:930–9.[29]Kawada H,Srivastava VK.The effect of an acidic stress environment on thestress-intensity factor for GRP pos Sci Technol2001;61: 1109–14.[30]Kang TJ,Kim C.Energy-absorption mechanisms in Kevlar multiaxial warp-knit fabric composites under impact pos Sci Technol2000;60: 773–84.[31]Antunes JM,Cavaleiro A,Menezes LF,Simões MI,Fernandes JV.Ultra-microhardness testing procedure with Vickers indenter.Surf Coat Technol 2002;149:27–35.[32]Boukhoulda BF,Adda-Bedia E,Madani K.The effect offiber orientation angle incomposite materials on moisture absorption and material degradation after hygrothermal pos Struct2006;74:406–18.[33]Ray BC.Temperature effect during humid ageing on interfaces of glass andcarbonfibers reinforced epoxy composites.J Colloid Interf Sci2006;298: 111–7.[34]Abdel-Magid B,Ziaee S,Gass K,Schneider M.The combined effects of load,moisture and temperature on the properties of E-glass/epoxy composites.Compos Struct2005;71:320–6.N.Mortas et al./Composite Structures108(2014)205–211211。